Could autism be caused by not enough sun? I sincerely hope that parents of children with autism-spectrum disorders apply the appropriate degree of skepticism and caution to the latest possible explanation for this most maddening of diseases. The absence of a convincing explanation for the recent increase in children diagnosed with autism must be exasperating -- witness the willingness to embrace and cling to the discredited theory that vaccines containing mercury are the culprit. This new suspicion is little more than that, however, and it may prove just as wrong.
The theory, propounded by psychiatrist John Cannell is that pregnant women and kids aren't getting enough Vitamin D, which is generated by exposure to sunlight. From today's Globe and Mail:
Dr. Cannell says some of the strongest evidence vitamin D may have a hand in the disorder is that the vitamin is converted in the body to a steroid hormone, which in animal experimentation has been found to influence brain development. If vitamin levels are low, whatever brain development it is linked to will be skewed.
Unfortunately, that's about all we have in the way of a theory so far. Studies exploring changes in sunlight exposure over time and autism diagnoses haven't been done. Neither has a study comparing autism and latitude. Maybe there is a link. But the way this idea is evolving and propagating isn't going to help make the case.
Although Dr. Cannell is something of a maverick in research circles, he has credentials. Last year, he published an important peer-reviewed paper linking low vitamin D levels to an increased susceptibility to influenza, based on research at his hospital.
But for his autism hypothesis, he is now jeopardizing his chances of publication in a scientific journal by e-mailing the Vitamin D Council newsletter outlining the idea to thousands of U.S. autism activists - a possible violation of the rules of publication.
Dr. Cannell said he decided to disseminate his hypothesis now to encourage the public to increase its sun exposure during the warmer part of the year.
"If only 10 pregnant women go outside and sunbathe a little bit, they may be saved a lifetime of misery," he said.
Maybe. But what about the consequences of planting yet another abortive seed of hope in the minds of parents desperate to find a reason for the incredible hardship that is autism? Whatever happened to the peer-review process?
Vitamin D is being touted, by Cannell and others, as something of a miracle molecule these days. Just last month, it was a cancer cure of sorts. It may yet turn out to be even more important than many optimists hope. I would have no objection to taking a Vitamin D pill every morning if it helps stave off cancer, autism or the heebie jeebies. But the Vitamin D Council's gushing endorsement of this explanation du jour is premature, even if it does go on to point out that it's still a theory:
In addition to the current epidemic of vitamin D deficiency, say another epidemic--an epidemic of autism--was upon our children? What if the autism epidemic began at the same time the epidemic of vitamin D deficiency began? What if both epidemics had worsened in unison? What if one theory explained all the unexplained facts about autism? What if both epidemics had the same root cause: sun avoidance? What if both were iatrogenic, that is, medical advice to avoid the sun had caused both epidemics?
Of course, it's probably not a bad idea for most people to spend more time outdoors (instead of blogging, for example), and I have no objection to advising people to do just that. Dermatologists needlessly scared many people inside in the past few decades by overstating the threat of skin cancer from a few minutes in the sun (as opposing to pathological tanning).
But again, it would seem reasonable to proceed with caution, considering how irrationally some autism support groups collectively react to shoddy and incomplete science.
- Log in to post comments
It's a shame and misleading to call these ideas theories. Based on the quoted passages, these are merely interesting speculations that could lead to testable hypotheses.
Unfortunately, I get the impression that Cannell is disinclined to formulate any actual hypotheses, much less test them.
If Vitamin D deficiency --caused by the lack of sunlight-- during pregnancy was a contributing factor to autism, we'd expect to see more autistic children at northern latitudes, and more autistic children born in Spring (gestated during winter months).
No such correlation has been observed. Dr. Cannell is a FUD-quack.
He didn't even try to verify his hypothesis.
I expect that the very first thing epidemiologists have done, searching for the cause of autism, is to check for vitamin and mineral deficiencies, diet, and lifestyle correlations, in mothers and children.
Hang on a minute... I'm not sure what counts as an "epidemic of vitamin D deficiency", but I do know that in the 19th / early 20th centuries, rickets (caused by severe vitamin D deficiency) was pretty much endemic in industrial cities, because the smog was so thick it blocked out the sun. So if vit D deficiency is linked with autism, we should see a massive rise during the Industrial Revolution, and a significant reduction around the time that measures were adopted to deal with smog in the mid-20th century.
First question is "is there really an epidemic of vitamin D deficiency?"
PSYCHIATRIST John Cannell??
Another new field of expertise in the causes of autism?
Maybe he can team up with the TV statisticians from Cornell...
Yup, heard that one a while back. In view of the fact that neither of my two autistic boys like 'outside' that could be a little worrying, but I was outside a great deal when I was pregnant with them and when they were babies [when I had the POWER]
Cheers
If vitamin D played a role in autism, the disorder should be less common at more sunny equatorial latitudes, at least before modern sun-avoidance. In an unpublished manuscript, Grant and Soles found a strong positive association between latitude and prevalence of autism in international cohorts born before 1985, but not after. Recent CDC prevalence data from 14 states showed the state with the highest prevalence, New Jersey, was the second most northern; Alabama, with the lowest prevalence, was the most southern of the 14 states surveyed.
Studies on season-of-birth and autism are contradictory, as would be expected if calcitriol deficiencies can impair brain development during either gestation or in early childhood. However, at least seven studies found excessive autism births in the winter, especially March, when vitamin D levels are at their lowest. (See Stevens et al for a review) Furthermore, a clear urban versus rural distribution occurs with autism, similar to that which exists for rickets, with significantly lower rates in rural areas.
If vitamin D deficiency is involved in autism, and if its damage extends beyond gestation, autistic children may improve if they move to latitudes that are more equatorial, increase their sun-exposure, or change to vitamin D-rich diets. Consistent with the theory, not all children diagnosed with autism retain that diagnosis in adulthood and a few improve, either spontaneously, or after the myriad of various treatment programs available. (Herbert et al.) Naturally, any anecdotal reports of improvement generate skepticism that the initial diagnosis was correct, an obvious possibility. However, if vitamin D was involved in autism, then symptoms might improve in the summer, when vitamin D levels are the highest. A case study reported dramatic improvements in both sleep and behavioral problems in the summer. Furthermore, significant improvements in autistic behaviors occurred after a summer camp program that included swimming, hiking, boating, and other outdoor activities that would increase brain levels of calcitriol.
If maternal or postnatal vitamin D deficiency caused autism, then parents who rigorously complied with medical sun-avoidance advice would be more likely to have children with autism. Parents from higher socioeconomic strata are more likely to apply sunscreen to their children, as are parents with a higher education. Although numerous studies, especially early ones, linked higher social class with autism, socioeconomic bias in case ascertainment confounds such associations. However, a recent study found significant positive associations between mother?s education, family income, and autism and it was not clear that ascertainment bias could explain all the findings.
In other words, Dr. Cannell, you were speaking out of your ass, and spreading fear to push ... vitamin D pills on pregnant mothers ???
Older fathers and older maternal grandfathers at the mothers birth are a major cause of non-familial autism. There are many other risk factors. Vitamin D deficiency is not a credible CAUSE of autism to me.
http://www.schizophreniaforum.org/for/curr/Malaspina/default.asp This cause of autism and other genetic autoimmune and nervous system myelin based disorders has been known since at least 1980 or maybe even 1958 Finally, we examined if paternal age was related to the risk for autism in our cohort. We found very strong effects of advancing paternal age on the risk for autism and related pervasive developmental disorders (Reichenberg et al., in press). Compared to the offspring of fathers aged 30 years or younger, the risk was tripled for offspring of fathers in their forties and was increased fivefold when paternal age was >50 years. Together, these studies provide strong and convergent support for the hypothesis that later paternal age can influence neural functioning. The translational animal model offers the opportunity to identify candidate genes and epigenetic mechanisms that may explain the association of cognitive functioning with advancing paternal age.
\
I really do not understand the antagonism to Dr Cannell's theory.
Sunshine is free and encouraging everyone, of any age to get regular, LIMITED, exposure to sunshine will raise the average levels to levels associated with optimal health.
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/85/3/860 Hypovitaminosis D in British adults shows most people in the UK are Vitamin D insufficient most of the time.
Similarly because Vitamin D3 is not in it's basic natural form a patentable produce it is very cheap. No one can make a fortune from a product that is so readily and cheaply available.
One thing that unites most Vitamin D researchers is http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/85/3/649 "The urgent need to recommend an intake of vitamin D that is effective"
If parents and prospective parents follow Dr Cannell's advice and try to raise their vitamin D status to above 100nmol/L before pregnancy and maintain that status throughout pregnancy and lactation it will have cost them, depending on where they live (could be free if regular exposure to UVB containing sunlight is available throughout the year) or less than $15 (13,50 sterling to UK) By no means is this an amount that anyone would worry about losing if it is later proved that autism is not affected by vitamin D status of mother either during pregnancy or lactation.
Raising the question that Vitamin d status MAY affect brain development is a worthwhile contribution to the debate. The conference at http://app2.capitalreach.com/esp1204/servlet/tc?cn=asbmr&c=10169&s=2034…; provides a lot of useful information about the general importance of Vitamin D3.
The Talk by Vieth explains the safety issues pay particular attention to slide 75 of that session
Those wanting to ensure the natural levels of Vitamin D3 status that allows the mothers vitamin d to appear in her breast milk need to listen to the Hollis session. Slide 126. You can use the arrows by the slide preview to fast forward. (if you are on limited broadband use the audio/slide alternative or your broadband allocation will be used up)
There will be benefits from having optimal maternal vitamin d status. One surprising one is the reduction in Colds & flu discussed in this Independent Online article. http://news.independent.co.uk/health/article2447662.ece
Maternal vitamin D intake during pregnancy and early childhood wheezing concludes "Increasing maternal vitamin D intakes during pregnancy may decrease the risk of wheeze symptoms in early childhood."
So if you follow Dr Cannell's theory, it does NOT prevent you undertaking any other strategy that you may consider helpful in reducing Autism risk, if Cannell's theory is wrong you will have spent a trivial amount of money but gained fewer cold/flu/possibly less chance of an asthmatic child among many other benefits that MAY be associated with higher vit d status. The point is that having the NATURAL level of Vitamin D3 your body evolved to acquire is likely to be more beneficial than the current status which we know is generally below those levels associated with worse health outcomes.
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedi… Circulating Vitamin D3 and 25-hydroxyvitamin D in Humans:
Well that certainly makes me the cause of my son's autism. As a lupus patient since 1981 (age 15 at diagnosis) I have since that time carefully avoided sun exposure. Now I feel guilty. Are there any studies out there of lupus patients' kids and autism?
In a series of recent animal experiments, an Australian group found severe maternal vitamin D deficiency in rats produce offspring with aberrant apoptosis and abnormal cell proliferation, reduced expression of a number of genes involved in neuronal structure, hyperlocomotion, and subtle alterations in both learning and memory. When vitamin D deficiency is restricted to late gestation only, such deficiencies are sufficient to disrupt adult brain functioning.
Recently, a French group found developmental vitamin D deficiency dysregulates 36 proteins involved in mammalian brain development, including biological pathways for oxidative phosphorylation, redox balance, cytoskeleton maintenance, calcium homeostasis, chaperoning, post-translational modification, synaptic plasticity, and neurotransmission. The lack of pathological specimens from infants with autism prohibits us from knowing how similar animal pathology is to human pathology but severe gestational vitamin D deficiency in rats produces pups with increased brain size and enlarged ventricles, anatomical abnormalities similar to those found in autistic children. ,
Dysregulated immune responses are associated with both autism and vitamin D deficiency. For example, autistic individuals have T cell abnormalities and cytokine excesses that show a striking similarity to the immune functions affected by vitamin D. Animal evidence indicates some vitamin D deficiency induced brain damage may be malleable, that is, vitamin D may partially reverse the brain damage, if given early enough. These studies offer hope that sunlight or exogenous vitamin D, especially in young autistic children, may have a treatment effect.
Both the brain and the blood of autistic individuals show evidence of ongoing chronic inflammation and oxidative stress.(Herbert et al.) That is, the disease process is probably increasingly destructive. Further hope for a nootropic effect rests in calcitriol�s powerful anti-inflammatory properties. Its administration down-regulates production of inflammatory cytokines in the brain, which have consistently been associated with cognitive impairment. Furthermore, calcitriol is remarkably neuroprotective by stimulating neurotropin release, reducing toxic calcium levels in the brain, inhibiting the production of nitrous oxide, and by its immunomodulating properties� especially in reducing inflammatory cytokines � and by increasing brain glutathione.
This last function of vitamin D, increasing cellular levels of glutathione, may explain the purported link between heavy metals, oxidative stress, and autism. For example, calcitriol attenuates iron-induced and zinc-induced oxidative injuries in rat brain. The primary route for the neurotoxicity of most heavy metals is through depletion of glutathione and subsequent generation of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species. Besides its function as a master antioxidant, glutathione acts as a chelating agent to remove heavy metals.
Kern and Jones review several studies indicating autistic individuals have difficulty excreting heavy metals, especially mercury. If calcitriol deficient brains are unable to utilize glutathione properly, and thus unable to remove heavy metals, they may be oxidatively damaged by heavy metal loads normal children easily excrete. It bears repeating that the amount of calcitriol in the brain directly depends on how much vitamin D is made in the skin or put in the mouth.
The vitamin D theory of autism predicts that consumption of vitamin D-rich fish during pregnancy would favorably affect fetal development and improve the offspring�s mentation although several factors confound such studies. Some ocean going fatty fish, such as salmon, herring, and sardines, are rich sources of vitamin D but other fish are not. Furthermore, some fish contain mercury, which may impair mentation. Fatty fish, fish liver oils, and fish body oils also all contain omega-3 fats, which favorably affect mentation. As mentioned above, fish oils dissociate vitamin D from its binding protein, raising free calcitriol levels. Finally, fish liver oils such as cod liver oil � but not fish or fish body oils � contains substantial, variable, but potentially toxic amounts of vitamin A, which antagonizes the action of vitamin D. ,
Consistent with the vitamin D theory of autism, higher fish consumption during pregnancy was associated with better infant cognition with the greatest effect for infants whose mothers consumed the most fish. Very recently, low maternal seafood consumption was associated with infants who had an increased risk of lower verbal IQs and suboptimal outcomes for prosocial behaviors, fine motor, communication, and social development, outcomes eerily similar to autism.
Dr. Cannell, many parents are curently avoiding fish and seafood, because of the autism/mercury scare, promoted by quacks like you.
I see you're even referring to the "bad excretors" post-hoc speculation.
Other parents of autistic kids are giving their children megadoses of vitamins, upon the advice of quacks like you.
If Arthur visited Dr Cannell's website he would see the advice is not to take megadoses of Vitamin D3.
I quote "pregnant women, infants, children, everyone�especially autistic children�should receive sensible sun exposure daily: around noon or 1:00 p.m., expose as much skin as possible, 10�30 minutes duration�depending on how easily one sunburns. In the winter, use a suntan parlor once a week, with the same precautions, or better yet, purchase an ultraviolet vitamin D lamp for home use."
For those for whom regular, limited, direct sun exposure is not possible then Dr Cannell explains why an ENTIRELY NATURAL amount of Vitamin D3, equivalent to that which would be obtained naturally from sunlight, are required. Dr Cannell's suggestions are based on the latest science from Hollis, Vieth, Heaney and others.
You may hear these scientists discussing their latest findings at a conference for Vitamin D scientists if you google "Contemporary Diagnosis and Treatment of Vitamin D-Related Disorders"
Is that so ?
The US Dietary Reference Intake for vitamin D, for children and adilts, is 200 IU/day.
On the web, you see the nice advice provided by Dr. JJ "Quack Quack" Cannell:
"Children over 50 pounds need up to 2,000 units a day. Under 50 pounds, about 1,000 units a day. There is no way to know for sure how much you need without a blood test, called a 25-hydroxy-vitamin D."
"It might be a good idea to keep pharmacological doses (50,000 units) of vitamin D next to your antivirals and take a 50,000 unit capsule at the first sign of the flu, although there is not one study to support such a practice. It might help tame those unchained macrophages and save your life or it might not help at all. You can buy 50,000 unit capsules from Bio-Tech-Pharm ."
I see Mr Non-Profit Sunshine endorses specific brands of pills.
Elsewhere:
"All of the patients on my ward had been taking 2,000 units of vitamin D every day for several months or longer." (those would be his prisoners guinea pigs)
"Dr. Cannell's approach to vitamin D for disease prevention is even more aggressive. He and his family members take 5000 IU of supplemental vitamin D daily during the winter months. "The implications are breathtaking," says Dr. Cannell.
----
So the recommended dose is 200, Dr. Callell suggests it should be 1000, but himself take 5000 worth of pills, and encoureage others to do so, and then jumps to 50,000 to beat the sniffles. Another megadoses freak quack.
Doctor Cannell is a pale imitation of Linus Pauling, minus the 2 Nobels, up one letter in the alphabet.
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/85/1/6 Risk Assessment for Vitamin D shows no ADVERSE events occur under 10,000iu/daily. In actual fact 40,000iu/d is needed to raise status sufficiently to cause hypercalcemia.
Try listening to Slide 76 of the Vieth session at the Conference available here http://app2.capitalreach.com/esp1204/servlet/tc?cn=asbmr&c=10169&s=2034…;
I do think you are getting Cannell's references to Stoss therapy with Vitamin D out of all proportion. He clearly indicates this is "1,000-2,000 units/kg per day for three days only" is not a recommendation for everyday use, rather a treatment for emergency use only. He warns
"Remember, bottles of 50,000 IU vitamin D are a medicine, not a supplement, and you will make yourself vitamin D toxic, and you may even die, if you take a 50,000 IU capsule every day for months or years. "
The Vitamin D requirement in health and disease
Robert P. Heaney
http://www.europeansunlight.eu/research/uvradvitd/Heaney%20(2005).pdf
may help you get up to speed on current Vitamin D3 research.
If you can find a cheaper, supplier of effective strength, Vitamin D3 Cholecalciferol, than that obtainable from links from Dr Cannell's Website then please tell us.
Most UK readers will require, given regular, limited, direct exposure to sunshine will provide at least 50% of their daily 4000iu/requirement, only 3 @ 5000iu/week costing some £0.15p/week from Dr Cannell's source during the summer, so if you could help them by providing a link to a cheaper source I and I'm sure the other reader will be most grateful.
Risk Assessment for Vitamin D shows no ADVERSE events occur under 10,000iu/daily. In actual fact 40,000iu/d is needed to raise status sufficiently to cause hypercalcemia.
Try listening to Slide 76 of the Vieth session at the Contemporary Diagnosis and Treatment of Vitamin D-Related Disorders Conference
I do think you are getting Cannell's references to Stoss therapy with Vitamin D out of all proportion. He clearly indicates this is "1,000-2,000 units/kg per day for three days only" is not a recommendation for everyday use, rather a treatment for emergency use only. He warns
"Remember, bottles of 50,000 IU vitamin D are a medicine, not a supplement, and you will make yourself vitamin D toxic, and you may even die, if you take a 50,000 IU capsule every day for months or years. "
The Vitamin D requirement in health and disease
Robert P. Heaney
may help you get up to speed on current Vitamin D3 research.
If you can find a cheaper, supplier of effective strength, Vitamin D3 Cholecalciferol, than that obtainable from links from Dr Cannell's Website then please tell us.
Most UK readers will require, given regular, limited, direct exposure to sunshine will provide at least 50% of their daily 4000iu/requirement, only 3 @ 5000iu/week costing some £0.15p/week from Dr Cannell's source during the summer, so if you could help them by providing a link to a cheaper source I and I'm sure the other reader will be most grateful.
Right, Dr. Cannell tells people to get more sunshine, and get to get it from a bottle.
And he's not paid for his numerous products endorsements.
If you look at Cannell's vitamin D website it is a joke. The real surprise would be if he claimed that vitamin D had no relation to autism - because apparantly vitamin D helps with everything else: cancer, hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, hyperparathyroidism, mental illness, multiple sclerosis, obesity, arthritis and chronic pain.
http://www.vitamindcouncil.com/research.shtml
Dr. Cannell tells people to get more sunshine,
True
and get to get it from a bottle.
Only if they cannot for some reason get it from sunshine for free.
And he's not paid for his numerous products endorsements.Exactly. The site operates on a shoestring, it does invite donations from members of the public but I doubt that is going to raise much.
The January 2006 edition of the newsletter explains where the money so far has come from.
There are no adverts on The Vitamin D Council website, unlike this site.
So have you been able to find a cheaper provider of high strength Cholecalciferol?
I'm waiting for you to suggest cheaper providers of 5000iu D3 than those listed at The Vitamin D Council website.
Do I assume you would only name a cheaper provider if you were paid by that provider?
Or is it that you cannot find a cheaper source of effective strength Vitamin D3?
If you look at Cannell's vitamin D website it is a joke. I'm afraid the joke is lost on me. I see in the main links to peer reviewed published research and links to articles published in the press discussing those research findings.
The real surprise would be if he claimed that vitamin D had no relation to autism - because apparantly vitamin D helps with everything else: cancer, hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, hyperparathyroidism, mental illness, multiple sclerosis, obesity, arthritis and chronic pain.
So you think people shouldn't be drawing the public's attention to the latest science on Vitamin D3?
Enter pubmed in google and you will find the database I use.
Enter cancer vitamin d in the pubmed searchbar and tell me how many articles have been published.
I can find 4538, try reading the conclusions of just a few of these and then come back here and tell me if you still think it's a joking matter. Try limiting your search to just those papers listed in the last 180 days and you will find more than sufficient evidence to support Dr Cannell.
Here are just a couple for starters
Our data provide additional support for the inverse association between vitamin D and colorectal and, in particular, colon cancer risk.
Additionally, it can be assumed that dermatological recommendations on sun protection and health campaigns for skin cancer prevention will have to be re-evaluated to guarantee a sufficient vitamin D status.
I'm sure your understanding of science is sufficiently good for you to be able to provide for other less enlightened readers a laymans guide to this quote
When analysis was confined to cancers diagnosed after the first 12 mo, relative risks for the Ca + D group fell to 0.232 (CI: 0.09, 0.60; P < 0.005) but did not change significantly for the Ca-only group.
Do you think that's a joke?
Perhaps you need to spend a bit more time at pubmed entering the other items in the searchbar and perhaps emailing Dr Cannells website with the papers that haven't been provided with links as yet. It would be a somewhat more constructive than your contributions here.
What is a joke is the Vitamin D - Autism hypothesis. Next time I see my kid's neurologist we will get a good laugh. All of my kids spent a good portion of their day outside in the Texas sun, one has autism. Vitamin D had nothing to do with it and f*-* all the worthless quacks like you and Cannell who want to send parents scurrying off on another pointless snipehunt.
And where in PubMed did Dr. Cannel found that vitamin D "deficiency", as redefined by him, was the cause of Autism ?
There must be a low prevalence of autism in sunny California, that must have been his first clue.
And where in PubMed did Dr. Cannel found that vitamin D "deficiency", as redefined by him, was the cause of Autism ?
The theory that vitamin D deficiency, during pregnancy or childhood, causes autism is just a theory.
Before you start researching anything you need a question to answer.
Now Cannell has asked the question "Is Autism Related to Vitamin D deficiency?" He has brought together a certain amount of work to support this theory and now people can look for the answers.
The answers shouldn't be long in coming.
It should be easy to link the Vitamin d status of mothers at the time of conception and through pregnancy and lactation to the eventual diagnosis of autism or not.
Putting forward a new scientific or medical theory is an exceedingly brave act. It would have been very tempting for someone with lower ethical standards than Dr Cannell to have floated the idea anonymously. It takes courage to express totally new thoughts and particularly ideas which challenge current orthodox thinking. If Cannell is proved wrong then the harm to his reputation and career prospects will be immense. If women assume he MAY be correct and raise their vitamin D status to optimal while pregnant and lactating then the only outcomes will be improved health, maybe less asthma, maybe less allergy, maybe less diabetes, maybe their babies bodies will be imprinted with more cancer preventing genes so I am not aware of any adverse events that are likely to follow from having OPTIMAL vitamin D status during pregnancy/lactation. If these women do produce the same incidence of Autistic spectrum kids as low vitamin d staus mothers then they will not have wasted their money/time becoming Vitamin D replete. The only risk is to Dr Cannell's reputation.
There must be a low prevalence of autism in sunny California,I think you may have overlooked the fact that there is also a lot of air conditioning in California too. I haven't been there but I get the impression people don't walk a lot in California. They may also spend a lot of time in their pools/hot tubs and as Vitamin d is made on the surface of the skin they may wash a lot of the vit d away. I also think you may be underestimating the use of Sunscreen, sunblock and Sun protection factor cosmetics.
I appreciate Philadelphia isn't in California but "Low vitamin D levels may be common in otherwise healthy children " shows a fairly high incidence of vitamin d deficiency.
that must have been his first clue.I expect like others Dr Cannell is disturbed by the fact "There has been a 273% increase in the number of autistic children attending 21 regional centers in California between 1987 and 1998. " Google "Autism link to 'geek genes'" for source.
It however could well be that more intelligent/affluent parents are more "Caring" and more inclined to over-indulge in Sunscreen/sunblock/spf clothes cosmetics and more inclined to stay in their air conditioned homes. If you can find vitamin D deficiency in Australia then I think you will find it everywhere. People have been made aware of the danger of Skin Cancer and for many this apparent danger has resulted in them becoming vitamin D deficient. For each individual who dies of excessive sunburn induced cancers 30 will die from those cancers that thrive in Vitamin D insufficient bodies. While a lot of money is spent warning people of the dangers of TOO much sunshine NO one is telling people of the dangers of TOO LITTLE sunshine and too low a vitamin D status. If you count all the lives wrecked by those chronic conditions Dr Cannell has linked research to on his site you will find the odds work out at 600 vitamin d insufficient victims to each single sunburn induced cancer death. The hysteria against LIMITED regular sun exposure is such that one only had to mention suntan parlors and ignorant folks scream MELANOMA at you like wailing banshees.
"Putting forward a new scientific or medical theory is an exceedingly brave act."
We are already inundated with quack theories and quack cures. Dr. Cannell theory has already been disproved. No scientists will have to disprove it all over again, but still for years to come gullible people will refer to Dr. Cannell "theory" and consume megadoses of vitamin C, (or is it D now ?), and quack Dr. Cannell will never acknowledge his theory was wrong. Ever.
"For each individual who dies of excessive sunburn induced cancers 30 will die from those cancers that thrive in Vitamin D insufficient bodies." -- quackery.
Dr. Quack Cannell presents vitamin D as a panacea, that fight all known ilneses, including cancer, diabetes and halitosis.
His tactic is bait and switch: he talk about fresh air and sunshine, then redefine the daily dose up by a factor five, the recommends 5 time that dosage in pills supplements ten tells people that they can also take 10 times that dose with only greater positive effects!
One can get his or her 200 UI by drinking milk and walking outside 10 minutes; Dr. Cannell recommends to take 5000 UI from pills. And to take 50,000 UI pills if they feel a cold coming. He's a quack.
I can't be bothered to refute your ill informed prattle. When and only when your back up your nonsense with published scientific medical research will I reply to any further posts you make.
I will deal with this rubbish though
"For each individual who dies of excessive sunburn induced cancers 30 will die from those cancers that thrive in Vitamin D insufficient bodies." -- quackery.
For Gods sake wake up and look at the statistics before you make such a dam fool of yourself.
Solar ultraviolet-B exposure and cancer incidence and mortality in the United States, 1993�2002
Francis P Boscoe and Maria J Schymura
has the facts.
This is how it works out in the UK We found evidence of an inverse association for nineteen cancer sites Here are the UK 2004 death totals for some of those cancers.
prostate = 10.209
female breast = 12.347
colon = 16,148
ovary = 4,434
uterus = 3,204
bladder = 4,816
Oesophagus = 7,230
kidney = 3,611
lung = 33,044
pancreas = 7,040
stomach = 5,881
gallbladder = 102
larynx = 655
Hodgkin lymphoma= 294
non Hodgkin lymphoma=4418
myeloma = 2531
Total number of cancer deaths that could be lowered by increased sun exposure =115,964
total number of cancer deaths which may be attributable to too much sunshine
the Five other sites found to be positively associated with solar UV-B are
Here are the uk 2004 death totals for those cancers.
cervix = 1093
melanoma = 1777
non-epithelial skin cancer= 310
oral cavity = 877
Total that are positively linked to sun exposure 4057
So for every one person who MAY be harmed by too much sun 30 people MAY be harmed by too little sun.
The point is that you don't have to get SUNBURNT to get sufficient Vitamin d but you do need regular limited safe sun exposure and this is FAR more beneficial to far more people than the dangers that may be attributed to over exposure. Do take account that this balance sheet is only considering Cancer Deaths When you add in the extra MS cases Autoimmune Illness Diabetes Heart Disease, Hyperparathyroidism, Hypertension,Osteoarthritis Osteoporosis, Obesity I could go on, that are related to vitamin d insufficiency you will see that it is far more important for people to get regular sun exposure than to completely shun the sun.
The reports here explain the issues in greater detail but make no mistake NOT getting sufficient sunlight is FAR FAR FAR more dangerous than getting too much.
The urgent need to recommend an intake of vitamin D that is effective Just so happens that Reinhold Vieth, Heike Bischoff-Ferrari, Barbara J Boucher, Bess Dawson-Hughes, Cedric F Garland, Robert P Heaney, Michael F Holick, Bruce W Hollis, Christel Lamberg-Allardt, John J McGrath, Anthony W Norman, Robert Scragg, Susan J Whiting, Walter C Willett and Armin Zittermann
1 From the Departments of Nutritional Sciences and of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (RV); the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Canada (RV); the Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA (HB-F and WCW); the Department of Rheumatology and the Institute of Physical Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland (HB-F); the Department of Epidemiology and the Channing Laboratory, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA (WCW); the Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging, Tufts University, Boston, MA (BD-H); the School of Population Health, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand (RS); the Vitamin D Laboratory, Section of Endocrinology, Nutrition and Diabetes, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA (MFH); the Departments of Pediatrics, Biochemistry, and Molecular Biology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC (BWH); the Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California and the San Diego Naval Health Research Center, San Diego, CA (CFG); Creighton University, Omaha, NE (RPH); the Division of Biomedical Sciences, Department of Biochemistry, University of California�Riverside, CA (AWN); the College of Pharmacy and Nutrition, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada (SJW); the Department of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Heart Center North-Rhine Westfalia, Ruhr University of Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany (AZ); The Centre for Diabetes and Metabolic Medicine, Queen Mary School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of London, London, United Kingdom (BJB); the Queensland Centre for Schizophrenia Research, The Park Centre for Mental Health, Brisbane, Australia (JJM); the Department of Psychiatry, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia (JJM); and the Department of Applied Chemistry and Microbiology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland (CL-A)
Agree with Dr Cannell and think the RDA needs raising.
Only someone totally ignorant would suggest that 200iu vit d3 is actually sufficient.
You left out Autism from your litany.
Don't want to stake out a position, here, but Arthur said: Dr. Cannell theory has already been disproved.
...has it? Can we get some more on that?
Seems to me that it's a pretty reasonable, if early, hypothesis. There might be some unjustified (at this early stage) excitement by the pro-D crowd, but it's hardly the nutso song and dance and complete misrepresentation of fact that the MMR people get into. Why the harsh reaction?
From the correlations given so far here, it seems well worth looking into. If the Doc has jumped the gun with an announcement, well, it's unfortunate, but understandable.
If there's some crushing flaw in the hypothesis, I'd like to hear it.
Smelly, the causes of autism have been investigated for quite a long time. The very fisrt thing any epidemiology study does is to investigate correlations between diet and the ilness, with a special attention to minerals and vitamin deficiencies. They failed to observe the expected correlation.
If Dr. Cannel, --who is a psychiatrist, not a nutitrition expert --, thinks those multiple studies are all wrong, he should read them, criticize them in peer-reviewed journals, and start the research that will confirm his hypothesis.
Instead he chose to air his idle speculation as another scare story for pregnant women.
Japan low level of heart disease is in great part attributed to their fish-rich diet. They receive plenty of vitamin D from food and sunshine. And yet, their autism rate is comparable to the US and Eurpean rate.
Dr. Cannell crusade for Vitamin D as a cure-all is no different that Linus Pauling crusade for megadoses of vitamin C against the common cold and cancer -- minus the Nobel prizes.
Anyone that preach for more sunshine and exercise is doing the right thing. Anyone who preach for better nutrition is right.
But when Dr. Cannell presents vitamin D as a cure for all ilnesses, and recommends both high doses and megadoses of vitamin D, with little scientific support, he falls into quackery.
And his non-profit "Vitamin D Council" is the perfect front for a very lucrative business. No doubt he makes the income he used to make as a psychiatrist, now as a quack nutritionist.
Vitamin D deficiency discriminates based on skin color, or more precisely, on the amount of melanin in the skin, which is an effective and ever-present sunscreen. The vitamin D theory predicts that neurodevelopmental disorders would be more common in children born to darker-skinned mothers. Such studies are difficult as they raise sensitive social issues although three of four recent U.S. studies found a higher incidence of autism in black children, sometimes appreciably higher. Furthermore, in Europe, autism rates are higher in children of dark-skinned immigrants. Gillberg et al reported that the incidence of autism in Goteborg, Sweden, for children born to mothers who emigrated from Uganda, was 15%, about 200 times higher than in the general population. (See Newschaffer et al for a review of autism's epidemiology.)
Several studies indicate black mothers are more likely to give birth to infants who weigh less and die shortly after birth and low birth weight is a clear risk factor for autism. Black babies also have lower Apgar scores. Low Apgar scores are associated with both autism and poor prenatal vitamin D intake. The CDC and others report black children have significantly higher rates of mild mental retardation than white children do and socioeconomic factors could not explain all the differences. (For a review of such studies, see Yeargin-Allsopp et al, 1995.)
The incidence of preeclampsia significantly decreased in white women during the summer months, but not in black women, suggesting vitamin D has an effect in such disorders, as long as skin color is light enough to rapidly generate vitamin D from incidental sun-exposure. Furthermore, multivitamins containing vitamin D reduced the risk of preterm and low birth weight infants. Twelve hundred units (30 mcg) per day of vitamin D in the third trimester significantly increased birth weights while 600,000 units (15 mg) given in both the 7th and 8th month of pregnancy increased birth weights even more.
Recent studies of vitamin D deficiency during pregnancy showed striking racial inequities in maternal vitamin D levels. Bodnar et al found that only 4% of black women and 37% of white women in the northern United States were vitamin D sufficient in early gestation (4-21 weeks). That is, 96% of pregnant black women and 63% of pregnant white women did not have adequate 25(OH)D blood levels. Their infants faired little better and showed the same racial inequity. Furthermore, 45% of the pregnant black women, but only two percent of the pregnant white women, were severely deficient. Prenatal vitamins containing vitamin D (400 units or 10 mcg) offered little protection for mother or infant, 90% of the women in the study reported taking them.
Unless infants receive direct supplementation or drink vitamin D enriched formula, infant vitamin D levels are remarkably low with African American infants at highest risk; 78% of unsupplemented breastfed Iowa infants had levels less than 11 ng/ml during winter. [For those who wonder how vitamin D could be important for brain development, given its very low levels in breast milk, Hollis and Wagner discovered that breast milk is always a rich source of vitamin D � enough to maintain healthy levels in infants - as long as the lactating mothers took 4,000 units (100 mcg) per day.)
In 2002, Nesby-O�Dell et al found almost 50% of young black women of childbearing age had vitamin D levels lower than 15 ng/ml and 12 percent had levels less than 10 ng/ml, compared to 1/2 of 1 percent of white women. While it is unknown how those levels compare to levels obtained in the animal studies reviewed above, it may be that white children have a huge developmental advantage over black children, an advantage that begins immediately after conception - one that has nothing to do with innate ability and everything to do with environment.
The references are on the website at http://www.vitamindcouncil.com/health/autism/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/he…
Is a story in this morning's Telegraph. Here are some quotes.
"As if diabetes and MS were not worrying enough, it has now been suggested that autism may be caused by insufficient vitamin D during pregnancy and/or early years.
Autistic children have difficulty in forming relationships, but they also tend to have larger heads, changes similar to those found in baby rats that are bred with insufficient vitamin D.
Recent increases in the incidence of autism, which now affects one in 88 children in the UK, may have been caused by advice to avoid or restrict sun exposure, says Dr John Cannell, a California psychiatrist and founder of the Vitamin D Council, a non-profit advocacy organisation.
The theory will certainly be controversial, not least because it could lend support to the suggestion that some children are harmed by the MMR vaccine.
People who are autistic have been found to be more sensitive to poisoning by heavy metals, a condition that may be more likely to occur when the body has insufficient vitamin D.
Dr Cannell suggests that mercury present in vaccines may have caused brain damage in children who were vulnerable because they had low levels of vitamin D.
Dr Richard Mills, research director of the National Autistic Society, says: "There has been speculation in the past about autism being more common in high-latitude countries that get less sunlight and a tie-up with rickets has been suggested - observations which support the theory."
Of course, if Dr. Cannell wasn't a quack, he would know that the MMR vaccine never contained mercury-based preservatives, so the link with the other quack study linking autism with heavy metal posioning would be unwarranted.
Dr. Richard Mills says: "There have been speculation in the past that the Moon was made of green cheese".
In my experience, most people believe, think, and then speak, in that order. It is rare to find someone who observes, thinks, and then speaks, leaving the believing to others. If you read the Guardian article carefully, observing before believing, you will discover I never said MMR vaccines contained mercury.
The entire autism/mercury issue is politically and emotionally charged to the point of mass hysteria. Environmentalists believe mercury, in any dose, is exceptionally toxic and thus proof big business is harming us. Conservatives believe environmental scientists are just trying another end-run on capitalism, using autistic children are their fullbacks. Parents of autistic children are angry and are looking for something or someone to blame. Furthermore, in the USA, families of autistic children are at risk of winning large financial rewards, if they can show it is more likely than not that vaccines contributed to their child?s condition, bringing plaintiff attorneys into the fight. If we ever needed scientists who observe, think, and then speak, in that order, it is with autism.
There are numerous, well-designed, epidemiological studies that show Thiomerosol, per se, does not cause autism. However, science has not looked at the subgroup of children who are vitamin D deficient and I'm not sure if extant studies can exclude the possibility that Thiomerosol damaged that subgroup. Certainly there is evidence autistic children cannot excrete mercury as well as normal children. Why? Is it because vitamin D upregulates production of glutathione, the substance that chelates mercury, allowing for its excretion? I don't know.
Furthermore, if tiny amounts of environmental mercury damage vitamin D deficient brains, but not vitamin D replete brains, is mercury the villain? Certainly, in medicine the villain would be the vitamin D deficiency, not the mercury. However, legal villains are not always the same as medical ones.
As I understand it, tort law takes the plaintiff as he is, called the eggshell skull principal. If your ninety-five-year-old grandmother has extremely soft and brittle bones and your neighbor backs his car into hers, only slightly denting the fender, the eggshell skull principal of the law says your neighbor is still legally responsible for damage to the bones of your grandmother, although medicine would say the villain was osteoporosis.
Perhaps the eggshell skull principal applies to Thiomerosol vaccines, autism, and the millions of dollars the government is waiting to hand out. First, one would have to present evidence that vitamin D deficiency was involved in autism, then evidence the child was vitamin D deficient at the time he was vaccinated, then evidence that deficiency made the child super-sensitive to the mercury, and finally evidence that sensitivity caused autistic damage.
In the meantime, about 12 percent of African American women of childbearing age have no detectable vitamin D in their blood. In the northern USA, more pregnant women are vitamin D deficient than vitamin D replete and taking prenatal multivitamins offers pregnant women little or no protection. More and more newborns are having hypocalcaemic seizures from severe neonatal vitamin D deficiency. Rickets is resurgent. Maternal vitamin D deficiency in rats damages the pup's brains. How many human fetuses are having their brains damaged as you read this? I don't know but I do know that scientists who observe, think, and then speak, in that order, leaving believing to others, will give us the answer.
P.S. For those interested in the role vitamin D plays in brain development, I suggest Chapter 100 of Feldman's textbook, "Vitamin D."
The associations Dr. Cannell speaks of are compelling and should be investigated. It is not surprising that he hasn't formed a hypothesis or generated any convincing research, these things take an enormous amount of work and resources, and the process is becoming more complicated, not to mention the obstacles that big pharma may create to funding. Getting that kind of research started is a full time job, and I believe Dr. Cannell already has one of those. To say that the thimerosol link to autism has been discredited based on a study that excluded autistic children from it's sampling is foolish. I wish it was as simple as 'take children, sprinkle in thimerosol, watch for instant garden of autism' but the cause of the condition is multi-factorial. It takes a genetic predisposition, combined with a lack of vitamin D and the addition of thimerosol and perhaps other sources of mercury or heavy metals and toxins, and perhaps even some degree of physical trauma, and all occuring at a crucial window in nervous system development, it is no wonder that it seems to strike at random.
In addition, since vitamin D and its hormone analogue, calcitriol are necessary for proper gene transduction, a lack thereof will predispose one to an impaired physiologic response to any insult, stress or injury. If you ignore that basic molecular biological fact, you will have no shortage of autistic children to study in the coming years. Anyone who dismisses compelling links to such a spectrum of devastating illness/conditions should be forced to care for an autistic child for at least a week, or to spend an afternoon with un-medicated ADHD children; that should cure them of their cynical bias.
We won't know until research has been done to compare autism incidence according to the Vitamin d status of the mother over the 12 mths prior to birth and during lactation. In the mean time maintaining optimal Vitamin d status is the safest option.
It seems reasonable to maintain any child or adult's vitamin D3 sufficiency, regardless of autistic status. But especially if a child or adult is already ill, it seems reasonable for a caregiver to exert himself to detect and remedy any dietary and environmental deficiency. In detecting deficiencies, it seems reasonable to begin with those deficiencies that are said to be most frequent and those that are said to have the most numerous and most severe consequences. Whether one cares for an autistic child or a normal one, it seems one will gladly supply ample vitamin D3, the deficiency of which seems to contribute to so many illnesses.
thanks..
There are so many comments here that nobody will ever see this, but I just wanted to take issue with the tone of the author's post. People who are gluten and lactose intolerant often have problems absorbing vitamin D. It has nothing to do with sunlight. I take a multivitamin with 100% of the RDV. I also live in the South, where there's no shortage of sunlight, and I love to be outside. And yet, a recent blood test revealed pathologically low levels of vitamin D - just a few points above the minimum acceptable level. For what it's worth, I have a diagnosis of Asperger's disorder. Mr Hrynyshyn might want to take this information into consideration before he gets so righteous about Vitamin D having no relationship to autism. Getting enough sun and getting enough vitamin D are not at all the same thing.
Thnkss.
The issue is readily solved by a simple blood test.
Blindly recommending any dosage without monitoring would be silly.
The standard of care should simply be to monitor all women who may become pregnant since levels need to be normalized before conception. Same applies for b vitamins.
The next problem is that it is likely that daily bathing interferes with bitamin d production in the skin. Look at the 50% deficiency rates in surfers.
Folks tend to forget the enormous death rates by other nutritional deficiencies.
Our best teacher is history.
Just look at b vitamins. How many diseases are caused by b deficiencies?
Pellagra, Beri Beri, neural tube defects, etc.
Then look at the massive studies done sine our food was supplemented on CVD, birth defects, etc.
It is unreasonable to hypothesize that vitamin (hormone) D has similar systemic effects?
The recent Lappe study clearly established D affects heart disease.
Finger pointing and name calling are not science. Hmmm, why are 73% of all suicides Caucasian males?
Science is the business of facts.
You cannot assume because you are out in the sun that your vitamin D levels are adequate:
1: J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007 Jun;92(6):2130-5. Epub 2007 Apr 10. Links
Low vitamin D status despite abundant sun exposure.
Binkley N, Novotny R, Krueger D, Kawahara T, Daida YG, Lensmeyer G, Hollis BW, Drezner MK.
University of Wisconsin Osteoporosis Research Program, Madison, WI 53705, USA. nbinkley@wisc.edu
CONTEXT: Lack of sun exposure is widely accepted as the primary cause of epidemic low vitamin D status worldwide. However, some individuals with seemingly adequate UV exposure have been reported to have low serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentration, results that might have been confounded by imprecision of the assays used.
OBJECTIVE: The aim was to document the 25(OH)D status of healthy individuals with habitually high sun exposure. SETTING: This study was conducted in a convenience sample of adults in Honolulu, Hawaii (latitude 21 degrees ).
PARTICIPANTS: The study population consisted of 93 adults (30 women and 63 men) with a mean (sem) age and body mass index of 24.0 yr (0.7) and 23.6 kg/m(2) (0.4), respectively. Their self-reported sun exposure was 28.9 (1.5) h/wk, yielding a calculated sun exposure index of 11.1 (0.7). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Serum 25(OH)D concentration was measured using a precise HPLC assay. Low vitamin D status was defined as a circulating 25(OH)D concentration less than 30 ng/ml. RESULTS: Mean serum 25(OH)D concentration was 31.6 ng/ml. Using a cutpoint of 30 ng/ml, 51% of this population had low vitamin D status. The highest 25(OH)D concentration was 62 ng/ml. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that variable responsiveness to UVB radiation is evident among individuals, causing some to have low vitamin D status despite abundant sun exposure. In addition, because the maximal 25(OH)D concentration produced by natural UV exposure appears to be approximately 60 ng/ml, it seems prudent to use this value as an upper limit when prescribing vitamin D supplementation.
PMID: 17426097 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
You also cannot assume that a high UVB climate means adequate vitamin D levels:
1: Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Mar;87(3):608-13. Links
Vitamin D insufficiency in southern Arizona.
Jacobs ET, Alberts DS, Foote JA, Green SB, Hollis BW, Yu Z, MartÃnez ME.
Arizona Cancer Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA. jacobse@u.arizona.edu
BACKGROUND: Vitamin D deficiency or insufficiency has been observed among populations in the northern United States. However, data on the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in areas of high sun exposure, such as Arizona, are limited.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentrations in residents of southern Arizona and to evaluate predictors of 25(OH)D in this population.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional analyses of serum from participants in a colorectal adenoma prevention study were conducted to determine rates of vitamin D deficiency. Participants were categorized into 4 groups on the basis of serum 25(OH)D concentrations: <10.0 ng/mL, > or =10.0 ng/mL and <20.0 ng/mL, > or =20.0 ng/mL and <30.0 ng/mL, and > or =30.0 ng/mL.
RESULTS: The mean serum 25(OH)D concentration for the total population was 26.1 +/- 9.1 ng/mL. Of 637 participants, 22.3% had 25(OH)D concentrations >30 ng/mL, 25.4% had concentrations <20 ng/mL, and 2.0% had concentrations <10 ng/mL. Blacks (55.5%) and Hispanics (37.6%) were more likely to have deficient 25(OH)D concentrations (<20 ng/mL) than were non-Hispanic whites (22.7%). Sun exposure had a greater effect on 25(OH)D in whites than in blacks and Hispanics, whereas BMI appeared to be more important in the latter groups.
CONCLUSION: Despite residing in a region with high chronic sun exposure, adults in southern Arizona are commonly deficient in vitamin D deficiency, particularly blacks and Hispanics.
PMID: 18326598 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
High dose vitamin D treatment is routinely used to raise vit D levels:
Short-Term, High-Dose Vitamin D May Ease Deficiency
Expert says treatment could prevent several bone problems
-- Randy Dotinga
TUESDAY, Oct. 27 (HealthDay News) -- Researchers are reporting that eight weeks of treatment with large doses of vitamin D can eliminate vitamin D deficiency, and twice-monthly doses can keep the condition at bay for up to six years.
The dosage -- 50,000 international units (IU) every week or two -- was large but did not appear to be toxic, according to the study published in the Oct. 26 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine.
Vitamin D is crucial for the body. Among its attributes, it strengthens bones by helping the body absorb calcium and phosphorus from food. Low levels of vitamin D can cause rickets in children and an adult bone disorder called osteomalacia.
A deficiency can also lead to osteoporosis, and research has suggested that it also has something to do with higher risks for such diseases as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, autoimmune diseases and flu, the study's senior author, Dr. Michael F. Holick, director of the Bone Healthcare Clinic and the Vitamin D, Skin and Bone Research Laboratory at Boston University School of Medicine, said in a university news release.
For their study, the researchers treated 41 people who had low levels of vitamin D with 50,000 IU of the vitamin each week for two months. On average, their vitamin D levels nearly doubled after eight weeks, the study found.
Another 45 people were given 50,000 IU of vitamin D2 every two weeks. The researchers found that their levels also went up, but not quite as much.
"Vitamin D2 is effective in raising [vitamin D] levels when given in physiologic and pharmacologic doses and is a simple method to treat and prevent vitamin D deficiency," Holick said. "While treating and preventing vitamin D deficiency, these large doses of vitamin D2 do not lead to vitamin D toxicity."
The U.S. National Institutes of Health Office of Dietary Supplements recommends that you always talk to your health care provider before taking any supplements.
SOURCE: Boston University Medical Center, news release, Oct. 26, 2009
Copyright © 2009 ScoutNews, LLC. All rights reserved.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Jun;85(6):1586-91.
Vitamin D and calcium supplementation reduces cancer risk: results of a
randomized trial.
Lappe JM, Travers-Gustafson D, Davies KM, Recker RR, Heaney RP.
Osteoporosis Research Center, Creighton University, Omaha, NE 68131,
USA. jmlappe@creighton.edu
BACKGROUND: Numerous observational studies have found supplemental
calcium and vitamin D to be associated with reduced risk of common
cancers. However, interventional studies to test this effect are
lacking.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this analysis was to determine the
efficacy of calcium alone and calcium plus vitamin D in reducing
incident cancer risk of all types.
DESIGN: This was a 4-y,
population-based, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial. The
primary outcome was fracture incidence, and the principal secondary
outcome was cancer incidence. The subjects were 1179 community-dwelling
women randomly selected from the population of healthy postmenopausal
women aged >55 y in a 9-county rural area of Nebraska centered at
latitude 41.4 degrees N. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive
1400-1500 mg supplemental calcium/d alone (Ca-only), supplemental
calcium plus 1100 IU vitamin D3/d (Ca + D), or placebo.
RESULTS: When
analyzed by intention to treat, cancer incidence was lower in the Ca + D
women than in the placebo control subjects (P < 0.03). With the use of
logistic regression, the unadjusted relative risks (RR) of incident
cancer in the Ca + D and Ca-only groups were 0.402 (P = 0.01) and 0.532
(P = 0.06), respectively. When analysis was confined to cancers
diagnosed after the first 12 mo, RR for the Ca + D group fell to 0.232
(CI: 0.09, 0.60; P < 0.005) but did not change significantly for the
Ca-only group. In multiple logistic regression models, both treatment
and serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations were significant,
independent predictors of cancer risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Improving calcium
and vitamin D nutritional status substantially reduces all-cancer risk
in postmenopausal women. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov
as NCT00352170.
Since a lightly tanned Caucasian person going out in the sun and not bathing can easily get over 10,000 IU, fears of vitamin D overdoses or life-threatening "megadoses" are unsupported. Physicians routinely treat with 50,000 IU pills. I've taken 50,000 IU pills with no side effects.
Folks who do go out into high UVB sunlight all day can still have low vit D serum levels if they bath frequently. My serum vit D was 27 ng/ml after being out all day all summer, but I take 2 or more showers a day (morning and post-workout).
Life guards can easily have serum levels above 100 ng/ml with no side effects.
Some populations are highly at risk. Blacks, morbidly obese, and elderly will have deficient levels of vitamin D even when exposed to high UVB sunlight.
Science is about facts, not name calling and anonymous blogger troll behavior. Really no excuse for it; everyone has the world's largest library instantly at their fingertips.
What does anyone want to bet that 'Arthur', the commentor with potty-mouth and frat boy manners, will succumb to a vitmain D deficiency related illness? I think Arthur needs to sheda good bit of weight and educate himself o nthe current facts of vitamin D. Otherwise he'll be dead from cancer or a heart attack by Spring!
Arthur you pompous, misinformed horse's a**, your level of ignorance re: vitamin D is breathtaking. It seems someone as sure as you couldn't possibly be duped by yet another 'vitamin-of-the-month'. That won't happen to you and I can assure you of that statement. How my naughty man? Vitamin D is a steroid and all bets are off when it comes to its consideration as a vital supplement. the other steroids I am aware of do little things like determineing gender, size, and just about every other aspect that defines humanity. Ever heard of testosterone or estrogen? Well then add calcitriol to that group and do your research. Now off with you as it time for your chubby form to grow old before your time. And that's because people like you are eternally deficient in vitmain D and hence have much more wear and tear on your telomeres. In simple talk that means you are old before your time Arthur.